Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he? (page 7)

KateWild

Show where his scientific work is biased, please.-Viv

It's off topic, start a thread and I will be happy to join in. What are your motives for joining in this thread anyway?

KateWild

By way of review to keep on topic..................................

I conclude science cannot prove or disprove God.

Cofty and Phizzy say science can but have provided no examples yet. Cofty? Phizzy?

Kate xx

cofty

How does Soai prove there is no God? - Kate

Nobody claimed that.

You have been saying for months that the left-handedness of life is evidence of a creator. I directed you to Soai's work that demonstrated how simply homochirality can arise from an autocatalytic reaction.

Once again it turned out to be "not magic".

I conclude that science cannot prove or disprove God, but you insist it can disprove God exists. Cofty what scientific fact proves God does not exist?

Science makes god redundant. If she exists then existing is all she does.

We can show that any particular god does not exist using sceince and reason, but first the believer has to define their god.

KateWild

Okay cofty, I get what you're sayong now. You don't think it's magic. Thats your perspective, and it's okay to have that perspective. But I think it's all magic, and some of it I know how the magic works and other stuff, like the origin of life, is magic that is yet to me figured out.

A rainbow is magic too.

By magic I don't mean supernatural, I mean wonderful and exciting.

I also think the complexity suggests higher intelligence than me.

Kate xx

KateWild

If she (God) exists then existing is all she does.-cofty

I agree, that's why there are so many prolems with evolution, there was no need for wisdom teeth to be formed was there? Kate xx

cofty

By magic I don't mean supernatural, I mean wonderful and exciting.

Obviously.

I also think the complexity suggests higher intelligence than me.

You are appealing to the old "Paley's watch" argument that Darwin demolished 150 years ago.

You have still to suggest a single feature of design that can't be accounted for by unguided natural processes.

MadGiant

"I agree, that's why there are so many prolems with evolution, there was no need for wisdom teeth to be formed was there?" Kate xx

Wait, What?

Phizzy

The other question that believers have never satisfactorily answered for me, sorry, not the other question, but one among so many, is :

If your god did not exist, what difference would it really make ?

KateWild

unguided natural processes.-cofty

Lol this reminds me of a conversation you had with slimboyfat.

It's all about perspective. The autocatalyst is a guided process. "Naturally" in the lab, a racemic mixture is formed, in the lab we have to apply the catalyst. In nature the catalyst is automatically there. Can you see why I view this as guided?

BTW, the earth is round, SBF was just entertaining us all.

Kate xx

KateWild

Also Cofty to be fair, you have already ditched two world views in as many decades, so how can you be so confident about the third, that you won't need to ditch that too? Belief that scientism tells us everything we need to know about life is a world limiting perspective as much as religious fundamentalism. They are varieties of fundamentalism. Different perspectives as I have said.

Only joking with an element of serious

Love you to bits cofty

Kate xx

Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

Share this